Downloaded 37 times
Uploaded byDragan Gasevic
Technologies to support self-directed learning through social interaction
The document discusses the role of technologies in facilitating self-directed learning through social interaction, emphasizing the need for personalized learning approaches that cater to diverse student needs. It highlights the importance of feedback, effective instructional design, and social aspects of learning while addressing challenges in current educational frameworks. The ProSolo platform is introduced as a tool for implementing these concepts through technological scaffolding and learning analytics.
More Related Content
Similar to Technologies to support self-directed learning through social interaction
Technologies to support self-directed learning through social interaction
- 1. Technologies to support self-directedlearning through social interaction Dragan Gašević @dgasevic March 15, 2016 Digital Learning Week 2016 UniSA, Adelaide, SA, Australia Joint work with Zoran Jeremic, Nikola Milikic, George Siemens, and Shane Dawson
- 2. Educational landscape today “Non-traditional”students Long time to complete degrees Large classrooms Long waiting lists
- 3. Confirmation of differentneeds MOOCs
- 4. Learning does not i)happen only in school and ii) end with graduation
- 5. Departing from credit hours& performance focus
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9. Learning Personalization The Learner… BarbaraBray & Kathleen McClaskey, Personalization v Differentiation v Individualization Chart (v3) (2013) , http://www.personalizelearning.com/2013/03/new-personalization-vs-differentiation.html
- 10. The Learner… Learning Personalization BarbaraBray & Kathleen McClaskey, Personalization v Differentiation v Individualization Chart (v3) (2013) , http://www.personalizelearning.com/2013/03/new-personalization-vs-differentiation.html
- 11. Social interaction inlearning
- 12.
- 13. How to tieall these different pressing concerns together?
- 14.
- 15.
- 16. Self-directed learning with instructional,social, and technological scaffolding
- 17. Learners construct knowledge Learnersare agents Winne, P. H. (2006). How software technologies can improve research on learning and bolster school reform. Educational Psychologist, 41(1), 5–17.
- 18. Feedback, especially process andformative, is a must Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112.
- 19. Competency is asocial object
- 20. Learners are uniqueand so are their profiles
- 21. Learning does nothappen in a silo
- 22. Learning is credentialed basedon evidence produced
- 23. Institutions learn too (aslearning organizations)
- 25. Tenologies builds on Existinglearning technologies (LTI), social media, learning analytics, machine learning, information retrieval, recommender systems,…
- 26.
- 27.
- 28. Design-based approach iterative withinterventions
- 29. Siadaty, M., Gašević,D., & Hatala, M. (2016). Measuring the impact of technological scaffolding interventions on micro-level processes of self-regulated workplace learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 469-482. Effects of technological interventions
- 51.
- 52.
- 53. Adjustment to the newapproach
- 54. External locus ofcontrol
- 55. Change of discourseneeded! From adaptive learning to adaptive learners
- 56. Challenge Metacognitive skills Bjork, R.A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-Regulated Learning: Beliefs, Techniques, and Illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417-444. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823
- 57. Instructional design as themost active ingredient Clark, R. E. (2009). Translating research into new instructional technologies for higher education: The active ingredient process. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21(1), 4-18.
- 58. Central role ofinstructors empowered with technology Learning is not algorithmically driven!
- 59. Credentialing as a bigopportunity (if done right!)
- 60.
- 61.
- 62. Content frameworks across differentdisciplines
- 63.
Editor's Notes
- #5 Learners develop their competencies by harnessing the opportunities offered by social media and connections learners create while learning, working, or playing
- #6 Learners develop their competencies by harnessing the opportunities offered by social media and connections learners create while learning, working, or playing
- #7 Learners develop their competencies by harnessing the opportunities offered by social media and connections learners create while learning, working, or playing
- #8 Learners develop their competencies by harnessing the opportunities offered by social media and connections learners create while learning, working, or playing
- #9 Learners develop their competencies by harnessing the opportunities offered by social media and connections learners create while learning, working, or playing
- #10 Results of this study indicated that the instructors who used Signals perceived this technology primarily as away of transmitting summative feedback multiple times in a semester. With this technology, instructors aimed to inform students where they are standing early in the semester. Results indicated that student success was associated with instructional rather than motivational feedback, and type of rather than frequency of summative and formative feedback. Implications of these findings are discussed below. ► Study 1 examined how instructors define the content and nature of feedback in Signals with content analysis. ► Although formative feedback yields better learning experiences and outcomes, instructors focused on summative feedback. ► Study 2 examined the content and nature of feedback students received via Signals messages and their relation with success. ► Instructors should focus on type of rather than frequency of feedback, and send explicit and instructional feedback. ► Discrepancy between perception and application suggests a feedback message guideline or an inclusive message library. Tanes, Z., Arnold, K. E., King, A. S., & Remnet, M. A. (2011). Using Signals for appropriate feedback: Perceptions and practices. Computers & Education,57(4), 2414-2422.
- #11 Results of this study indicated that the instructors who used Signals perceived this technology primarily as away of transmitting summative feedback multiple times in a semester. With this technology, instructors aimed to inform students where they are standing early in the semester. Results indicated that student success was associated with instructional rather than motivational feedback, and type of rather than frequency of summative and formative feedback. Implications of these findings are discussed below. ► Study 1 examined how instructors define the content and nature of feedback in Signals with content analysis. ► Although formative feedback yields better learning experiences and outcomes, instructors focused on summative feedback. ► Study 2 examined the content and nature of feedback students received via Signals messages and their relation with success. ► Instructors should focus on type of rather than frequency of feedback, and send explicit and instructional feedback. ► Discrepancy between perception and application suggests a feedback message guideline or an inclusive message library. Tanes, Z., Arnold, K. E., King, A. S., & Remnet, M. A. (2011). Using Signals for appropriate feedback: Perceptions and practices. Computers & Education,57(4), 2414-2422.
- #16 understanding and documenting what learners know, regardless of where learning happens, is essential for creating adaptive learning opportunities;
- #17 understanding and documenting what learners know, regardless of where learning happens, is essential for creating adaptive learning opportunities;
- #19 Learners develop their competencies by harnessing the opportunities offered by social media and connections learners create while learning, working, or playing
- #20 Learners develop their competencies by harnessing the opportunities offered by social media and connections learners create while learning, working, or playing
- #21 understanding and documenting what learners know, regardless of where learning happens, is essential for creating adaptive learning opportunities;
- #22 understanding and documenting what learners know, regardless of where learning happens, is essential for creating adaptive learning opportunities;
- #23 Although learning may occur in informal and authentic contexts, a robust credentialing pipeline is necessary to assess and validate the evidence learners provide in order to demonstrate the achievement of stated competencies.
- #29 understanding and documenting what learners know, regardless of where learning happens, is essential for creating adaptive learning opportunities;
- #57 Students generally have poor self-regulation skills: Weak metacomprehension – assessment of own knowledge – stop learning, when they don’t know enough Confusion of the rate of learning - stop learning, when they don’t know enough Externally-generated self-monitoring prompts – Azevedo Weak metacognitive awareness – inefficient study tactics used